Lawsuit: Christina Aguilera's Hit Song Was Stolen

The hits just keep on coming for Christina Aguilera -- and we don't mean the chart-topping kind. The singer's label is reportedly facing a lawsuit surrounding her single, 'Ain't No Other Man.'

According to TMZ, Aguilera's song samples the 1968 song 'Hippy Skippy Moon Strut' (also known as 'I'll Be A Lucky Man') by Dave Cortez and the Moon People. According to a federal lawsuit filed in New York, the classic song's exclusive rights have been owned by TufAmerica since 2004. However, Sony Music went through Codigo Music and the Clyde Otis Music Group in order for Aguilera to sample the song on her album.

TufAmerica's lawsuit is asking for a court to declare it the rightful owner to 'Hippy Skippy Moon Strut' and put a stop to any other publisher's claims. And of course, TufAmerica is asking for punitive damages (aka money).

Luckily, it's her music label and not Aguilera herself facing the lawsuit, because the singer has had her fair share of bumps in the road recently. Though she recently joined the new NBC singing show 'The Voice,' she was arrested March 1 for public intoxication. She also infamously botched the national anthem at this year's Super Bowl and stumbled while onstage at the Grammys.

I was really torn on this one. After listening to as much of that dreadful first version as I could stand I was really torn. Anyone who could sit through that song having heard it first in 1968 would have to be either brain dead (or tied to a chair while it was playing) to think it improved with age. That funky, jazzy "Shaft" theme song crap was just awful. Dilema is do I want to listen to that song again AND with Aguilera "singing" (or whatever you called that dubbed, overdubbed, studio concocted lip sync noise that she produces)in the background? Nah, sorry can't subject myself to that torture. The rest of you will have to decide.

What is up with all the so-called musical talents having to "sample" other peoples music? It must be a nice way of saying" we need your music because we can't think of any of our own". Sampling and the mashups are the only way some of these "artists" can make it. The creative talent pool has hit an all time low.

The first song...Hippy Skippy whatever its called has a few licks from the song "tighten up" quite a few bars..someone could sue them. Look folks there are only so many notes you can pair together before it all starts sounding the same. Christina's song has a few licks in it that sound the same as the so called original but they sure took their time getting around to suing her. I think they just wanted to see how much money the song would make first before they decided to sue...had it not made a dime they wouldnt have cared at all.

That sample is in there, no doubt, but like it's previously been stated, the artist more often than not doesn't know if its an original song or samples are in the songs--that is the production team (and) record labels are responsible in the end. And it is VERY rare for the artist to write her own music, while she might write the lyrics...very, very rare to write the music. So this bomb lands in the lap of the producer and the label. CA is innocent...relax with the finger pointing.

ENOUGH ALREADY!!!!! Where do we get these writers that TWIST THE TRUTH TO KILL A STAR? It's people like you that put Jesus on the Cross! You do nothing but think the worst, relate the worst and ultimately WRITE THE WORST. Get it WRITE!!!!

today's so called artists if you dare even call them that, for the last 20 years have been stealing and sampling old music, its nothing new. crappers and crip hoppers do it all the time. that's why music has sucked for the last 20 years and keeps getting worse.

I have to say yeah it sounds similar but how many other artists of the 60's and 70's had that same type of sound, to the point of creating this exact note progression. I'm sorry but there are only so many notes/cords etc and only so many ways you can put them together in a way that is appealing. Even a teacher of mine said this at my college. ah well. people are greedy and do what they will to get money.

First off after I heard the first music and its crap and then when I heard Christina's music, I did not notice any similarities at all. There is no case, trying to get some money off an artist that is making money. I'm sure if you look at every artist's music today there are similarities. Just wasting peoples time, whoever started this lawsuit needs to get a life and start making their own money instead of trying to steal others.

In my opinion they dont sound like the same song. The drum beat songs similar and then the accented breaks sound similar. But dang when i listen to todays pop songs they all sound alike. If one is following the old R&B format/formula there are huge similarities and then every pop musician should be sued for just being similar.

The song is credited, just not to the "proper" owners of the song's copyright. And it's taken the alleged owners FIVE YEARS to realize this? If I were the judge in the case, I'd dismiss any and all monetary claims immediately. If you need FIVE YEARS to realize one of your songs has been "infringed," then you need to find another business to be in. I could understand if the song had been just some minor album cut, but Christina's song was a fairly big worldwide hit, not to belabor the point, FIVE FREAKIN' YEARS AGO (according to Wiki, it was Top 10 in the US and 14 foreign countries).

Get a grip!!!!The music is a "LITTLE" like the other song but most music from that time sounds alike. I am not much of a Aulilera fan and can care less if she wins or looses the law suite. However, this is just some washed up want-a-be trying to stuff their pocket with someones fame. I would love to be a juror in this case and vote NOT GUILTY.